• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Gay Marriage?


Munion

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
319
A return to the pre-1545 Council of Trent position whereby marraige is purely an ecclesiastical affair and has nothing to do with the civil authorities.

Parents of children would still receive tax exemptions but why should two people (regardless of gender) receive tax benefits purely because they're in a relationship with each other.
 

Freedom Fighter

New member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
4
Just wondering what people think? I think that civil partnership is an insult to gay rights, they should get the same rights as all of us. Even if they are all given the same rights but calling it something else is nothing but discrimination.
 

Freedom Fighter

New member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
4
A return to the pre-1545 Council of Trent position whereby marraige is purely an ecclesiastical affair and has nothing to do with the civil authorities.

Parents of children would still receive tax exemptions but why should two people (regardless of gender) receive tax benefits purely because they're in a relationship with each other.
Yes then therefore should we eliminate all exemptions given to married couples?. It is not as such that gay people just want the same rights but also to be under the same classification they should be allowed to lawfully be married and recognised as a married couple.
 
G

Gimpanzee

Even if they are all given the same rights but calling it something else is nothing but discrimination.
And that gem, in a nutshell, is a great example of why the far left receive little or no support when it comes to elections.
 

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
28,077
Just wondering what people think? I think that civil partnership is an insult to gay rights, they should get the same rights as all of us. Even if they are all given the same rights but calling it something else is nothing but discrimination.
You can't force every religion in the World to change their rules on marriage just to accomadate a section of the population.
It will open the door for bigamous, incestuos, and all sorts of people looking for same. No Priest, Iman or Rabbi will take this route.
A State endorsed union is all that will be possible in our lifetime.
 

Question R24U

Active member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
269
Just wondering what people think? I think that civil partnership is an insult to gay rights, they should get the same rights as all of us. Even if they are all given the same rights but calling it something else is nothing but discrimination.
Unless you can explain at a practical level the difference between the unpublished Civil Partnership bill and marriage as currently exists, your help will not be required. (There is nothing wrong wth discrimination per se, it is only when that discrimination results in injustice that it becomes a problem).

However, gay-rights activists who are straight and gay-activists who are gay and single, do help make some NOISE which scare the right wing conservative horses, so that when the Bill is published that it goes the same way as England ie marriage in all but name and without constitutional recognition (not even Peter Thatcell could object to it), the Government appears to have taken a compromise route which results in the removal on the current injustices which exist for gay couples (eg inheritance, maintence, property, access to hospital, funeral arrangements, citizenship etc).
 

TradCat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,992
The state should only have civil partnerships. If you want to get married go to a Church.

Civil marriage depends on a consensus view of what marriage is. We don't have that now and are less likely to have it in the future. So let's plan for diversity.

Why should a legal undertaking and a sacrament share a name anyway. Equality of citizenship should not conflict with the right of people to hold to their own view of marriage.

So for example a Muslim can have as many wives as his faith permits but only one civil partner. And a gay couple under the law will be identical to a male-female couple.
 

Freedom Fighter

New member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
4
yes but surely calling it by another name is in itself discrimination as you are not giving them the same classification. Is it not an injustice that the government is too conservative to call them married. Seriously what is wrong with calling a same sex couple married.
 

cropbeye

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
944
Recent

There was a very extensive thread on this matter not long ago.
 

tmesis2008

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
496
There is nothing wrong with the current marriage law except that it excludes gay couples. Religion is a personal matter and entirely beside the point. Religion certainly does not and should never have a monopoly on marriage .

Everyone in this state should have the right to marry their partner and have it recognized by the state and the arguments against giving that right to gay people without condition or semantics (infertility, traditional definition of the word, damage (as yet unexplained) to society, assumed promiscuousity of homosexuals; most homosexuals don't even want to be married, against God's law etc. etc.) are pathetically weak and have been discussed quite extensively already on this site.
 

NeilW

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
4,634
(not even Peter Thatcell could object to it)
I doubt there is ANYTHING Peter couldnt object to if he put his mind to it. I wouldnt be surprised to see him organising a march against motherhood and apple-pie.
 

MartinP

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2004
Messages
91
The same rights to marriage and all entitlements that go along with it should be allowed for non-hetrosexual couples.

Discriminating against people because of their sexuality..., what the fock are we, Nazis?
 

Lthse

Active member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
142
Another attack on the family by the neo-liberals.

When are the pc brigade going to get it through their thick heads that children NEED a father and a mother. When you start introducing same sex marriage then you also introduce equal rights for same sex couples. Property rights are another issue which I have no problem with, however when it comes to families and children I draw the line and make no apologies.
 

corelli

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
4,478
Unless you can explain at a practical level the difference between the unpublished Civil Partnership bill and marriage as currently exists, your help will not be required. (There is nothing wrong wth discrimination per se, it is only when that discrimination results in injustice that it becomes a problem).

However, gay-rights activists who are straight and gay-activists who are gay and single, do help make some NOISE which scare the right wing conservative horses, so that when the Bill is published that it goes the same way as England ie marriage in all but name and without constitutional recognition (not even Peter Thatcell could object to it), the Government appears to have taken a compromise route which results in the removal on the current injustices which exist for gay couples (eg inheritance, maintence, property, access to hospital, funeral arrangements, citizenship etc).
The differences, in a nutshell, are that there is no "rights" afforded in terms of adoption (as a civil partnership couple) and that none of the "rights" offered have Constitutional protection, unlike the presently understood marriage.
 

sandar

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
1,854
Just wondering what people think? I think that civil partnership is an insult to gay rights, they should get the same rights as all of us. Even if they are all given the same rights but calling it something else is nothing but discrimination.
I have bno problem with Gay marraige at all, it really is none of my (or the states buisness) what gender another individual wants to have their sexual relations with, and by stating that marraige is particulra to heterosexual relatiionships then that would be making it my buisness which I do not wish to do.
 

stringjack

1
Moderator
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
3,892
The differences, in a nutshell, are that there is no "rights" afforded in terms of adoption (as a civil partnership couple) and that none of the "rights" offered have Constitutional protection, unlike the presently understood marriage.
Plus any common law-related and case law-related stuff.
 

corelli

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
4,478

scsa1981

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
52
Another attack on the family by the neo-liberals.

When are the pc brigade going to get it through their thick heads that children NEED a father and a mother. When you start introducing same sex marriage then you also introduce equal rights for same sex couples. Property rights are another issue which I have no problem with, however when it comes to families and children I draw the line and make no apologies.
Agree 100%
 
Top